Talk:Warp Hustler (series): Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary
Tag: 2017 source edit
No edit summary
Tag: 2017 source edit
Line 10: Line 10:


::::: I mean, there's precedent of characters debuting in ''covered sources'' going on to have spinoffs and being covered, it just hasn't happened with an illustration before. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
::::: I mean, there's precedent of characters debuting in ''covered sources'' going on to have spinoffs and being covered, it just hasn't happened with an illustration before. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
:: To my mind, valid coverage would be perfectly fair to suggest if authorial intent were clear that this is "an ''Iris'' spin-off" (or better yet explicitly DWU), even if the original appearance of the spun-off character is minor. But the BTS quotes here just don't seem to support this. Hanley explicitly ''doesn't'' consider the cover to have been Janice's debut — just a time-displaced crossover. The relevant precedent here would thus seem to be the original decision on the ''Sleeze Brothers''. (And granted that's since been partially overturned, but due to factors specific to that series; I think the basic proposition does make some sense.)
:: I think any discussion of this is premature, anyway. Even if the illustrations can be considered works of fiction in their own right, I would feel much better discussing this with the actual ''Warp Hustler'' #1 in hand. If Iris makes a cameo in turn, for example, or some other indicator of intended DWUness, that would change things. But the current state of the evidence is just too little for me. I propose that we move all the pages created thus far to a sandbox-namespace, sit on it, and then hold a proper inclusion/exclusion debate ''after'' the actual first issue of the comic comes out and some of us actually read it. Right now we're just reading tea leaves. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 17:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:43, 2 August 2023

I'm genuinely gobsmacked at this. Are we seriously considering illustrations as an appearance? Have I missed the thread that approved this? How utterly bizarre and detrimental to this Wiki. DrWHOCorrieFan 17:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Many illustrations constitute a work of fiction unto themselves — something I completely agree with — which was established at Forum:Temporary forums/Non-narrative fiction and Rule 1#Illustrations & artwork. I suggest you read through that closing post. 17:07, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
I cannot get behind this. Such lack of thought went into this decision. How does a small cameo appearance, in this case Paul Hanley's character Janice, on an Iris Wildthyme book cover suddenly validate an entire series that has nothing to do with Doctor Who? DrWHOCorrieFan 17:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
The series has something to do with Doctor Who in that it's a Doctor Who spin off. The character Janice, who debuted on the cover of a Doctor Who anthology, is getting a spin off, therefore we cover it. Aquanafrahudy 📢 17:30, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Eh... There's no precedent for this, and hence no practice, and policy is also interpretable to a degree, so there's no absolutes here, as far as I can tell. But I agree that this series doesn't really deserve coverage for the character appearing on a cover alone. Saying that, I feel this discussion should be moved over to Talk:Warp Hustler (series). And I mean literally move-the-page, as this discussion will make as much, nay more, sense there. Cousin Ettolrahc 17:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
I mean, there's precedent of characters debuting in covered sources going on to have spinoffs and being covered, it just hasn't happened with an illustration before. Cookieboy 2005 17:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
To my mind, valid coverage would be perfectly fair to suggest if authorial intent were clear that this is "an Iris spin-off" (or better yet explicitly DWU), even if the original appearance of the spun-off character is minor. But the BTS quotes here just don't seem to support this. Hanley explicitly doesn't consider the cover to have been Janice's debut — just a time-displaced crossover. The relevant precedent here would thus seem to be the original decision on the Sleeze Brothers. (And granted that's since been partially overturned, but due to factors specific to that series; I think the basic proposition does make some sense.)
I think any discussion of this is premature, anyway. Even if the illustrations can be considered works of fiction in their own right, I would feel much better discussing this with the actual Warp Hustler #1 in hand. If Iris makes a cameo in turn, for example, or some other indicator of intended DWUness, that would change things. But the current state of the evidence is just too little for me. I propose that we move all the pages created thus far to a sandbox-namespace, sit on it, and then hold a proper inclusion/exclusion debate after the actual first issue of the comic comes out and some of us actually read it. Right now we're just reading tea leaves. Scrooge MacDuck 17:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC)